click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20110701
20110731
SHOW
Book TV 65
Hannity 42
( more )
STATION
MSNBC 312
FOXNEWS 299
CNNW 192
CSPAN 188
CNN 173
FOXNEWSW 173
CSPAN2 162
MSNBCW 151
KQED (PBS) 59
WHUT (Howard University Television) 58
WRC 56
KGO (ABC) 55
WUSA (CBS) 51
COM 46
KRON (MyNetworkTV) 45
WBAL (NBC) 45
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 2505
Spanish 14
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 2,519 (some duplicates have been removed)
this afternoon before we have a chance to chat. and that is the campaign of 1992. in 1988, barbara bush's role was not the same as '92. her popularity grew immensely in the white house. so in '88, she did give some speeches. the president had experienced a precipitous drop in his popularity. at the height of the persian gulf war i think his approval ratings were in the high 80s. by the time the '92 campaign began, they were probably around the 40s. and 1992 did not begin well and this is also another great barbara bush story. they had gone to japan to talk to the japanese who i know are very much in our minds right now about trade agreements. and the afternoon, just as a social event, a get-together the president and our american ambassador had played tennis with the crown prince of japan and the emperor okay. and they were badly beaten. well, that night, there was a state dinner in honor of the bushes and mr. bush on the way over said to barbara, i'm really not feeling well. and she said, well, do you think we should go back, and he said, for. you know, i think i can do it. and they got there
know exactly what the first lady is famous for. now i ask you, what about laura bush and currently michele obama? you put them in the category of the supportive spouses or would you put them in the second category of more of the presidential partner in response to their husbands? i would say think about this as a semi final point. that is that i think laura bush had to be the on hillary. hillary in the minds of the american people seem to go too far on health care initiative. people began to say, wait a minute. she is not elected, not accountable. if we don't like what she's doing we have no way of reaching her. remember, hillary dialed back in knots and became more of the traditional first lady by being in favor of women's issues like charles advocacy. so i think that suited her personality and also suited the times in terms of what we wanted from the first lady. i think michele obama had only been there two years and still feeling here wait. right now acting more the traditional first lady, a traditional policy in terms of women's issues. children and exercise an anti obesity. se
in this thing, but how is the country going to react to a 10 gallon sized george w bush. what about the brains it takes to be the number one world leader? you have heard this thing the other way, could this guy be all cattle and no hat. hi, i'm chris matthews. welcome to the show. with us today, howard fineman, nia-malika henderson, andrea mitchell and michael duffy. first off today, the switch boards led up this work with protests over grid look. at the polls. the most motivated republican voters are not fallen to house republican tactics. 73% of voters blame president obama, not the house republicans. and republicans think that debt cash will help them defeat the president. here is how they'll play the president's failure to win the grand bargain on the day. they'll claim the president showed weak leadership, that he was not the post-partisan compromiser, he that is still a big spender and probably most crucial, they'll tie this crisis to the jobs crisis. howard, right now there is a lot of heat all over the place, a lot of it against the right, the tea party people. come next year, how will
.60 trillion hole left by the bush tax cuts. that is it. we do nothing on the revenue side, so, yes, republicans have won. >> two columnists both right this week about the perils of central some. one right that americans have lost track of what the president is really for. you wonder if he has lost track of himself. has the president lost track of himself in this debate? >> i do not think he has lost track of himself. i think he has allowed so much ground now that he is not a major player in this. he can pretend that he is, but when he agreed to link the debt ceiling with deficit reduction, the game was over. >> do you think congressional democrats trust the president to do what they believe is the right thing in this? do they believe he will sign whatever comes his way? >> they already know he is not protecting democratic principles because he was willing to give away so much in his negotiations. he gave everything in the grand bargain. all he kept was some revenue increases. he put social security and medicare on the table. there is no reason for congressional democrats to think h
to the congressional budget office, is the $3.60 trillion hole left by the bush tax cuts. that is it. and we do nothing on the revenue side. so, yes, republicans have won. >> two columnists both wrote this week about the perils of centers and. >> i do not think he has lost track of himself. i think that he has lost too much ground now that he is not a major player in this. he can pretend he is, but when he agreed to link the debt ceiling with deficit reduction, ball game was over. >> do you think congressional democrats trust the president to do what they believe is the right thing in this? do they think he will sign whatever comes his way? that they already know he is not protecting democratic principles. he was willing to give away so much in his negotiations. he gave everything in the grand bargain. all he kept was some revenue increases. he put social security and medicare on the table. there is no reason for congressional democrats to think he is representing their interests, but they are saying, as opposed to members of the republican caucus -- they will blow up the place. some congressional demo
can classify president bush the father was a congressman from texas. although his roots were in maine and up north. president bush the son had lived in texas for a many longer time. but a lot of the presidents from the south had experienced directly with african-americans around them. which a lot of the northern presidents did not. lyndon johnson, also from texas had experience with african-americans around him. the presidents from the north, many times, some of them are considered iconic presidents in some ways like president kennedy had no experience with african-americans his whole life. he was not interested in the civil rights issue. it's only after he became president and rather later in his presidency in 1963 where he started to take notice of this tremendous bubbling up of the civil rights movement. you know, by the protesters in the streets. and being a world war ii veteran, he was very much admiral -- admiring physical courage. he saw the physical courage of the demonstrators. this impressed him a great deal. by the time his president -- he was assassinated, of course, he wa
. >> now from freedom fest 2011, transfixed, author of "in defense of the bush doctrine." mr. kaufman debates the merits with jacob hornberger, the founder of the freedom for future foundation. this is a little over 45 minutes. >> is about that time to get started. welcome, everyone, to her debate today on the bush doctrine, one of the most important issues within the political right and a key division between libertarian and conservative thinkers. my name is ryan calle and i'm an opinion writer for the orange county register for a senior at the associate research institute. i am here to listen, much like you are on this very, very important issue. with two distinguished guests. to my far left, we have mr. hornberger here today, president and founder of the future of freedom foundation, born and raised in laredo, texas and received his ba in economics from virginia military institute and law degree from the university of texas. i know we have some other university texas people will be here telling you what he does not believe in the bush doctrines. and then we also have, to my direct
and up north and president bush the son lived in texas for a long time but the presidents from the south had experienced directly with african-americans around them. which a lot of the northern presidents did not. i mean, lyndon johnson had lots of experience with african-americans around them. and the presidents from the north are considered like iconic presidents like president kennedy who had no experience with african-americans his whole life. was not after he was interested rather late in his president in 1963 where he started to take notice of this tremendous bubbling up of the civil rights movement, you know, by the protesters in the streets. and being a world war ii veteran, he was very much admiring of physical courage and he saw the physical courage of the demonstrators and this impressed him a great deal and by the time his presidency he was assassinated he was a much different kind of president dealing with civil rights than he was initially but, of course, that was cut short. >> host: you know, one of the things that so intrigued me about your book was the bibliography. you
. host: dennis from maryland. caller: good morning. please don't cut me off. when george bush came into power, we had a surplus. it was projected that by 2010, we would payoff our debts. george bush said we don't need the money. he took it and gave it back to the rich folks, then started two wars. they weren't paid for. when george bush left office, we were in serious deficit because of him ruining or wasting all of the surplus we would have had had he followed. >> let's bring it up to the current date. how are they doing handling the debt talk? caller: it's difficult for the president to get some senses. number one, you cannot just -- after all the give away that's we give to the rich, it's time they give back something. the only way you are going to balance the budget is that you have to put all the money over the last ten years. the rich have gotten richer. they are going to hedge funds. especially on oil. we are paying the price. >> we'll leave it there. another facebook comment. the same bill that came every couple of years from over a decade. what's changed? wait? different
former florida governor jeb bush. how are you? >> thank you, very well. [ applause ] >> sean: you miss the spotlight you've been out of the spotlight a little while. >> i'm in the corners, not wl much on television. i try to have my voice be heard, but not on a regular basis on tv. but it is an honor to be with you. >> sean: it is an honor to have you here. i'm going to ask you all the questions that i think -- we have serious issues. substantive issues we need to lead the country towards, for solutions. national review was pretty much begging jeb bush to get in the 2012 presidential race. did you see the piece? >> i did. it was very flattering. others have written nice things. then they move on to mike huckabee and mitch daniels. huckabee out, daniels out. >> a part of this is unfair to the candidates that are in the arena, running. they are all good men and women, capable. they've made the all-in commitment in yearning for something else is flattering for someone if you are that someone else. in reality, i think this race, we have qualified candidates. as it gets closer to the prima
give speeches if the dog bites you it is george bush's fault, according to barack obama. now a poll shows that is not working. how would you grade this president on two issues? the when and national security. >> i would say national security is work in progress. it is interesting that he was very critical as a candidate of the policies that my brother -- >> sean: you teach in florida, i'm going to get into your reform if you had to give him a grade? >> passing, but barely. i would say failing on the economy. the idea that you can stimulate economic growth by creating passive uncertainy for the folks that make investments that create the jobs, which are predominantly small businesses is not going to work. then the hyper regulatory climate on top of that and the fear of just change being always to the detriment of people that are willing to invest and compete and create jobs, it hasn't worked. it is clear that it hasn't worked. we have long term structural problems that we have to deal with. and i don't think we ought to be arguing on a partisan basis. we have short term challenges th
herbert walker bush evisceration where the world changes again. the soviet union disintegrates managing that process in a peaceful manner, certainly is one of the hallmarks of that first bush evisceration. you have the first gulf war, where we began to see in clear terms on national television the integration of space capabilities to enhance american warfighting capabilities. who can forget on cnn seeing the pictures of precision-guided emissions going in a window? that video is seared in the minds of those of us that followed that conflict and it was a perfect illustration of how america had integrated its space capabilities into its terrestrial warfighting capabilities and some say that recognizance strike complex that the soviets called it that we created and invested and throughout the year ended the cold war operational wise in the first gulf war has fundamentally changed the space policy discourse in particular as it relates to let terry affairs. the bush administration creates the national space council. the first two speakers talked about in various respects how you organize sta
for it under the bush administration except one and that was ron paul. so you probably would have been like most -- >> i'm sure he would have and like i said when i first read it before my confirmation, i was really very excited about it. >> commissioner mcdowell? >> i think statutory action is the best way to cut through this lot of regulations and provisions that have built up over the years and so i would be happy to work on something like that. >> commissioner wellinghoff, chairman? chairman stearns? >> as i indicated to congressmen bart and i don't have any specific recommendation for you will certainly anything the committee decided to draft we would be happy to work with you in any way. >> commissioner bixby 16? >> i think a government with rick healey if and legislative should review the legislation's, so with that in order i would certainly endorse that and then as the transit, i have a specific example about hydropower licensing i'm happy to provide greater with the complicated given the number of the federal laws involved but in the help we can provide and would be happy to do so
. >>> and is george w. bush secretly plotting to ruin a fellow texans presidential hopes? welcome to shot, i'm al sharpton. tonight's lead, fight to the debt. at a twitter town hall today, president obama blasted republicans for using the debt ceiling as a hostage in budget talks. >> the debt ceiling should not be something that is used as a gun against the heads of the american people to extract tax breaks for corporate jet owners. >> today, republicans definitely did not sound like they are in a mood to make a deal. at the white house, budget talks that are set for tomorrow. >> thursday's meeting will give us a chance to see if the president means what he says. until now the president's proposal are frankly indefensible np. >> so will republicans compromise even a little to get a deal or do they just want to be the party of no? joining me now, is republican congressman joe walsh from illinois. freshman lawmaker elected just last year with tea party support. so congressman, are republicans using a gun against the american people in these budget talks like the president says? >> hey, reverend sha
didn't start frankly with this president. it was in the previous administration, the george w. bush administration, when we started two wars and paid for them with a credit card, we started a costly prescription benefit program and used borrowed money for it. used borrowed money to pay for the tax cuts. the deficit has been accumulating in fact ballooning through the previous administration and here we are today with the radical right. i don't say all republicans because i don't believe this character rises all republicans. there are some on that radical fringe who seem to be in charge or driving the agenda in the congress right now and they are making the possibility of a balanced solution very very difficult. i'm hopeful and i think most americans are, as citizens, i say this as a citizen, not just as governor, that a balanced break through will come in the end and soon. >> president obama obviously inherited by common consent a big hospital pass in terms of the state of the economy, not just in america but around the world, very very tough to pull out of any kind of rapid way. ha
, with the new world order was going to be as president bush he wrote in his book with brent it literally was transformed and the space was a vision of how the united states could show leadership and could infect or -- in fact provide by positive global leadership in an area that is talked about technology and economic advocates to all nations. and most importantly the vision from the very beginning included, including russia and the soviet union and now russia in the mix and an act not just as an adjunct as a lot of participants in the space station program had been that it's a real partner. it turned out that leverage really was used with great success in the clinton administration where those initiatives and that vision were really put to great use for different purposes and i will let richard tell you about that. we wanted to refocus the entire the shuttle station as i said was very confiscated and when he began to look at the real structure of the program and it added in with the national academy about the value of the science, we didn't call it that but it has been termed a dead en
more revenue through the tax code by eliminating the deductions. >> would the bush tax cuts expire as planned? >> i certainly hope so as it relates to the higher income people. we do believe at this time when you're asking students to make sacrifices, asking our seniors to make sacrifices that the least we can do is tell the most well off in our community that they shouldn't be getting a continued tax break that was intended to expire. >> senator, your colleague from maryland fellow democrat barbara mccull ski told "the washington post" quote when we heard reports of megatrillion dollar cuts with no revenues, many of us were volcanic. what's she referring to as far as you knowsome. >> i talked to the president today. the president was clear that revenues need to be part of the final package. look, we know there's going to be spending cuts. we understand that. we're prepared to support a comprehensive balanced preach to get our debt under control. we need to make sure it is fair. to be fair we need to have the revenues to pay our bills. >> would you agree if there are no revenue tax
. we trust the bush and administration that they trusted him mostly he helped to tell a handful of wise to get them into the war. >> host: we hear about the special relationship and given the status of that are there lies told between the two nations as well? tony blair and bill clinton were close george bush and tony blair were very close. >> i looked very carefully at the relationship between tony blair and the art -- bill clinton and george of the bush. i know a lot about the bush player relationship because both were involved to drag their countries into war march 2003. thin in both cases of 20 blair and the case of george of the bush there is evidence they told a handful of lies to their public but there is no evidence they told lies to each other. they worked hand in hand to drag the united states and britain into that war. >> host: did you write this book before wikileaks started? >> yes. i began a long time ago 2003. i got a call from a man who was with "the new york times" and writing a piece for the weekend review section of the times on international wind. we had never met bu
voted against the debt limit when president bush was president . part of the theater. both parties do it . so that was then and this is now . now all of the sudden concerned about financial armageddon andiadiada. we have done it 18 times when ronald reagan was president and we are still in the same pickle. maybe americans are saying that dog don't hunt. >> i think what president obama was trying to do and i don't know the detail of the package. i think he thought because the pressure was on it might be a chance to bring people together and try to negotiate cuts. the way they really do it. one side no revenue enhances at all . the other side. no cuts in programs at all . the truth is, you have to have both. cut in programs and cuts in spending and those. why would you pay more for a lousy product? do you walk in a autoshow room and they say look at this beautiful lemon. it will cost you extra. why would anyone entertain pay more for the product. why not first address the product that is bloated out of the control and cost too much as it is. >> there is a lot of program that is middle c
. i asked about iraq because in the book i found more enthusiasm for george w. bush's call to arms in 2003 in the march invasion of iraq than one usually encounters now. even among people who were supportive of the war, who were members of the bush administration. it's typical in my experience as a columnist to find people looking backwards really scratching their heads and saying, you know, we're glad it turned out than people feared but we have to be honest, given what we now know that there weren't weapons of mass destruction, that war didn't make a lot of sense. there's a more enthusiastic account of the war in your book, just to read one brief passage, you're talking about the moment of argumentation at the united nations. there's never been a clearer case of an outlaw state using its privileges of statehood to advance its dictator's interest in the way that it defied and endangered the international system. so let me just ask, do you, as you look back, is there a little bit of doubt as to this was the right course to have taken? >> guest: no, i have no doubt that it was the r
division of the baath party. as if the boundaries were mirrored. i found more enthusiasm for george w. bush's call to arms in 2003, and the march invasion of iraq, than one usually encounters now. even among people who were supportive of the war, who are members of the bush administration. typical in my experience is a columnist who talked to people, to find people looking backwards, really scratching their heads and saying, you know, glad it turned out better than people here, but we have to be honest even now what we now know that there were not weapons of mass destruction. that war did make a lot of sense. there's a more enthusiastic account of the were in your book. just read one brief passage. you are talking about the moment of argumentation of the united nations. there have never been a more clear case of an using its privileges of statehood to advance its dictators interest in the way it in danger to the international system. let me just ask, as you look back, is there a little bit of doubt as to whether this was the right course to have taken? >> guest: know i have no doubt it was
, the national boundaries were mirrored momentarily. in the book i found more enthusiasm for george w. bush's call to arms in 2003 in the march invasion of iraq than one usually encounters now even among people who were supportive of the war, who were members of the bush administration. typical as my experience as a columnist to find people looking backwards really scratching their heads and saying, you know, glad it turned out better than people feared, but we have to be honest begin that what we now know, there were not weapons of massive destruction. there's a more enthusiastic account of your book and to read one brief passage talking about the moment of argumentation in the united nations, there's never been a clearer case using statehood to advance dictator's interest in ways that endangered the international system. let me just ask do you, as you look back, is there a little bit of doubt as to whether this was the right course to have taken? >> guest: no, i have no doubt that it was the right course to take. it was not conducted well, and we ran into enormous trowels in the state --
very much. >> hold on. under bush, the average outlay was $2.4 trillion. under obama, it's. >> what i'm saying of the $14 trillion we have as a deficit, the $2.4 trillion increase in debt ceiling has to go to pay for bonds. many of which were issued under ronald reagan. >> it doesn't have to. you could cut spending, you could do that? >> cut spending? you've got to cut enough spending to take care of all the obligations? >> absolutely. by the way, we're growing at 1.8% g.d.p. annually. if you cut spending, cut taxes, you get the g.d.p. going again and then you don't run the deficit, you run the surplus. >> if you do that, take the discretionary spending in the budget and cut it out together. every program, every air traffic controller, everything else. >> deal. >> you fly after that. i tell you that. >> anyone who thinks he will take the money and actually use it to pay down the deficit needs their head examined. >> not just the president, though. congress as well. it's been building up over the years and it was actually during president bush's administration that senator obama then r
an explanation of the bush tax cuts themselves be sufficient in your view to fit that piece of the puzzle? >> if you do not extended bush tax cuts, just for people making over $1 million that creates very significant revenue. extending the bush tax cuts, puts $700 billion on the table. democrats have said that should be part of the deal. we're also willing to discuss common sense spending cuts, but at the end of the day, michael, it's unfair to ask somebody in my district, in rhode island, to bear the brunt of this. they might want to send their kids to college. give up pell grants and don't send your kids to college. if you're making over $1 million, you get your tax cut. that's not a deal we could support. >> my question, couldn't the gop declare victory and go home if there were no revenue increases beyond allowing the bush tax cuts to expire? apparently giving a green light by grover norquist? >> he's back pedaled from what he said just this morning. a sense of how much disarray they're in. them tell us one thing and then do another. grover norquist said what you suggested and with ho
of george bush? maybe you might -- >> absolutely. >> -- recall that the debt inherited started with bush and when clinton handed bush the white house we were in a surplus and when mr. bush handed it to mr. obama we were in a deficit with two wars that might have something to do with the debt that you are talking about the country's in? we did not get the debt mr. president obama. we inherited it from mr. bush and it was handed to president obama. >> if you're looking for a fan of obama or bush, the tea party did not doo it for president bush. that's why the republicans lost power in 2006. president bush added $4 trillion to the deficit in eight years and that's pitiful. terrible and we have kicked him out of office for that. president obama increased the deficit by $4.5 trillion in less than three years which is insanity from a fiscal stand oint. we are saying that the tea party -- >> you are saying that the tea party kicked president bush out of office? >> we certainly stopped voting for them, for the republicans and we stopped sending them money, absolutely. that's why president obama
, is probably in competition only with george w. bush for least liked among the modern u.s. presidents. but liberals in congress this crazy week are willing to put that aside, if the voice of reagan can help bring republicans to their senses on how unbelievable it is that they really are still debating whether or not to destroy the economy. in the midst of all of this is republican presidential politics. jon huntsman and his campaign manager parting ways today. and then of course you have the vice presidential nomination. they want chris christie to run for president, but he will not, hint, hint, pick him for vice president. and mark rubio announcing as if we have been waiting for it that he will make his first out of his home state speech as a senator next month at the reagan library in california. is that a thing? the new awkwardness of course with how fast things are changing in washington is that markio rubio has said as recently as this past weekend he probably will not vote to raise the debt ceiling. in march, he wrote an op-ed entitled why i won't raise the debt ceiling, and tha
that george bush raised the debt ceiling several times to the tune of $5 trillion which is an essence the bush tax cuts to the wealthiest people in the country. ronald reagan did it a whole bunch of times so this is contrived on their part but what they're really playing with is not president obama's political future. what they're really playing with is the country's future. >> no question about it. congressman yarmuth, what do you make of the silence in the meeting after being chastised by harry reid and labeled his behavior is childish? is cantor the problem in all of this? is he the stick in the mud a deal? >> he is a big problem because he's actually been -- has either it is an tacetly encouraging the members of the tea party in their party to resist the increases the debt ceiling. they say they won't vote for an increase under any circumstances, no deal. i think he's responsible for that. this is entirely reckless behavior on his part. he's acting like not the most mature person in the room and unfortunately, you know, there's more than just a default crisis. that's big enough but you're
for george w. bush's call to arms in 2003 in the march invasion of iraq than one usually has now, even among people who were supportive of the war who were members of the bush administration. it's typical in my experience of a columnist to find people looking backwards scratching their heads and saying you know, glad it turned out better than people here but we have to be honest given what we now know there were not weapons of mass destruction and that didn't make a lot of sense. there's a more enthusiastic account just to read one of passage talking about the moment of argumentation in the united nations there has never been a clearer case of an outlaw state using its privileges of statehood to advance the interest in a way that the fight and endangered the international system. so let me just ask as you look back is there a little bit of doubt as to whether this was the right course to have taken? >> guest: no. i have no doubt that it was the right forced to take. it was not conducted well, and we ran into the enormous trouble in the state's that really sink president bush's approach, but
, not deficits. president george bush dealt with that problem quickly. under george w. bush we started incuring massive deficits again, so we had to start raising the debt ceiling again routinely. >> we are confronting a situation we hadn't in a few years, and that is the debt limit, where the government can't borrow any money. it's frozen at $5.95 trillion. what are we going to do about that? >> we're going to raise it as a reasonable government must. this is really housekeeping, tim. this has nothing to say or do with future spending. this simply reflects decisions made in the past and it ought to be kept as the housekeeping matter it is. >> the housekeeping matter it is. that was then george w. bush budget director, mitch daniels, who is is indiana's governor. mitch daniels arguing that raising the debt ceiling ought to be treated as the housekeeping matter that it is. no news here, just do it, don't even talk about it. during the george w. bush administration, they did just treat the debt ceiling as a housekeeping matter. the debt ceiling was raised seven separate times during the george w.
to the ones thatt bush instituted and he ones that obama's instituued -- have turned out to be vvry hard tt do anything to, you know, raise the - the state of thh housing market. and what will help consummrs s if prices stopped falling aad started risingg that would be the one that would hhlp everrbody." almost a decade has passed sincce presiddnt george w. bush, -3 speaking to a predomiiantly african-american audience at a church in atlanta,vvwed to increase theerates of minority homeownership.bush says:: "right here in america, if you own yoor own home, you're realizing the american dream. mister bush's initiative followed similar eeforts under president clinton. bbu it was, y most accounts, the pxpansion of mortgage lending to low-income borrooees - who creeit crisis.sowell says: "as someooe who lived in apartments, you know, mosttof his life, i have nnver uuderstoood hy there's sooe 3 houss."(()) with such weaa housing numbers... it's no wondee that consumer confidence remains so low. juut 111years ago... it was at itt
times during the bush years starting in june 2002. raised every year except for 2005. in 2008 it was increased twice. ezra, the republican party today is not the republican party of even a couple years ago. it seems it's overrun by people who are abolitionists, willing to abolish government and willing to bring it down if they have to, and they don't give a darn, or damn about the consequences. >> it's definitely a different republican party. the thing that keeps coming to my mind is they really haven't thought it through. the federal government pays 80 million checks in a month. we go through the debt ceiling, and according to the bipartisan policy center, 45% of our obligations will not be able to be paid. who is it exactly who will make the decisions of which obligations they are. if it's the treasury department, you're looking at the republican, a small executive branch making the larger pow transfer of power. it's a staggering change in the way we run or finances as a country. >> but the whole macroeconomic reality on this, help me, ezra, when the country puts out the wor
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 2,519 (some duplicates have been removed)